On Fri, 1 Oct 2004, Dave Korn wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski
> > Sent: 01 October 2004 15:31
>
> > > Almost; right issue, wrong problem. It turned out not that there
> > > wasn't a terminating NULL but that there was an extra one, one past
> > > where it should have been! This kind of problem is, apparently,
> > > _very_ easy to overlook and I guess we just got away with it in the
> > > past. -shrug-
> >
> > Hmm, an extra NULL shouldn't have any effect -- execv stops
> > at the first one, IIRC.
>
> Yes, but if you've created an argv[] on the stack to pass to execv, and it has
> just the right number of entries, and you go and write an extra NULL into
> it................
>
> IOW, the extra NULL does have an effect... just not on execv!
Ah. Argm. Ungh. Ehm. (a whole list of other sounds, that together mean
"thanks for the correction"). :-)
Igor
--
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
|\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing
whatever you think is worth doing." -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
